Here's another Japanese program bordering on jingoistic. It's in Japanese and subtitled in Korean.

There are objectionable moments throughout the program, but the ones that stand out most are the comments about Mirai Nagasu. For example, they praise the efforts of all FOUR Japanese skaters in Vancouver, and say that the future of Japanese skating is bright with both Nagasu and Murakami coming up the ranks. Yeah, you heard that right; the Japanese media paid absolutely ZERO attention to Mirai before the Olympics, but after her 4th place result, she's suddenly a Japanese skater.

Here's another Japanese program bordering on jingoistic. It's in Japanese and subtitled in Korean.

There are objectionable moments throughout the program, but the ones that stand out most are the comments about Mirai Nagasu. For example, they praise the efforts of all FOUR Japanese skaters in Vancouver, and say that the future of Japanese skating is bright with both Nagasu and Murakami coming up the ranks. Yeah, you heard that right; the Japanese media paid absolutely ZERO attention to Mirai before the Olympics, but after her 4th place result, she's suddenly a Japanese skater.

As an American I find this at once both offensive and pathetic.

I don't understand why JP tries to claim Mirai. She skates for the US. *shrug*

I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that the television crew was taking various shots and of course taking shots of the Korean judge with the possibility in mind of Yuna with two mistakes winning against perfect Mao. If this had happened, then those shots would have been edited entirely differently. Maybe they would have shown the images with less blurring, or without covering up the back with other extraneous images so that the viewer could easily tell that the back was an Asian woman.

But you see, this scandal was avoided because Yuna is a strong competitor and she skated perfectly, and so the shots of the back was edited to become an unidentifiable blur to the casual viewer.

Yes, but this is my issue. Don't you think the act itself is crossing the line? I don't think this is representative of the Japanese people, but this program itself and its producers should be penalized. What are they implying by even taking that video? That Yu-na bought the judges in order to secure her victory? That the judges distribute scores not according to what they see, but what they're paid to see? That they even took a camera to film the judging (and may I include, that of a particular judge) makes me doubtful of their motives. That they took videos of a judge scoring only Mao and Yu-na also discredits the argument that they want to only show curious people how the scoring is done. Such TV programs should spend their time and money explaining the GOE system, rather than filming judges illegally and packing the program with insinuations.

If Mao had skated perfectly and Yu-na had not, Yu-na still would've received the high GOEs for her successful jumps, although she most certainly would not have won. Look at GOE levels in general. If you remove the highest and the lowest, the scores are generally level, as the protocols prove. It's not as though Mao receives the full spectrum of 0 to 3 for one jump. She receives similar levels. It's not a matter of Mao being misjudged. It's just a matter of Mao's 3A not meeting the GOE requirements as much. I've also noticed that people like to compare Mao's GOE with Yu-na's, whose jumps are so perfectly in tune with the GOE system that they seem tailored to it (esp. those in her LP). Mao's GOE when compared with other skaters' is even, if not higher. I think you have a better argument if you ask for yet another GOE category, one for risk taking, rather than arguing with the given GOE criteria, as that won't get you very far. You could also argue for a greater bv for the 3A, as it's much harder for women than it is for men (a gender scale for bv).

This debate is wearing me out. It also makes me sound like a Mao-hater WHICH I'M NOT (but I will be frank and open about the fact that I prefer Nocturne-Mao over Bells-Mao)

Here's another Japanese program bordering on jingoistic. It's in Japanese and subtitled in Korean.

There are objectionable moments throughout the program, but the ones that stand out most are the comments about Mirai Nagasu. For example, they praise the efforts of all FOUR Japanese skaters in Vancouver, and say that the future of Japanese skating is bright with both Nagasu and Murakami coming up the ranks. Yeah, you heard that right; the Japanese media paid absolutely ZERO attention to Mirai before the Olympics, but after her 4th place result, she's suddenly a Japanese skater.

As an American I find this at once both offensive and pathetic.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a US newspaper headline like this in Sochi 2014.
"An American beats Nagasu!"
If Flatt beats Mirai, of course. LOL

I only have access to a slow computer and can't access the clip to translate word for word, but the gist of the clip is that they are questioning the weight of the GoE's in deciding who wins.

So from memory, I think the clip first introduces the idea that Mao and Yuna had a different strategy for trying to win, that Mao tried to win by breaking an Olympic record by doing 3 triple-axels, whereas Yuna tried to win by perfecting the elements she was good at and getting good GoE's.

And then the clip goes on to an explanation of what GoE's are, that they range from -3 to +3, and shows the computer system that the judges uses to record their scores. And I think you had some voice over or the journalist saying things like 'Ah, yes, here is the yellow tab. This is the tab for 0 GoEs, and here are the red tabs for negative GoEs'. Stuff like that, I believe, but I'm explaining from memory so I'm sure I'm only getting the gist of it.

And then, I believe they cut to the competition and show how the computer system was actually utilized by judges, and so they showed e.g., Yuna doing an element and then juxtaposed it with the back of a judge using the end of an eraser to push a tab for GoEs, and I think the journalist is saying things like 'The green tab has been touched', and then show Mao doing her triple-axel with the same back and computer screen, and the journalist is saying 'The red tab has been touched', etc.

And I also remember Brian Orser being interviewed at a certain point in the program, and the voice over is just translating what he's saying. I think he was talking about the importance of GoEs or the nature of CoP-friendly program or something like that.

And then I think there was a short clip of a Caucasian-looking man---was he a judge?---and a voice asks something like 'why didn't Mao win', and he responds, 'Her jumps were not good'.

And then finally, I think Plushenko is interviewed, and the voice over is translating what he says, and I think he basically said that Mao should have been given more positive GoEs for her triple-axels.

And then I think that was about it. But I'm sure I only got the general sense across and probably got the sequence wrong.

I speak Japanese and watched the linked video and it's like that.

Originally Posted by Mrs. P

I think it's a matter of taking the high ground. I don't think there is anyone on this board who is FOR anonymous judging. But the fact is that it's highly questionable that this television station is trying to circumspect basic journalism ethics to get their story.

And the worst part is that the filming didn't really add much to the story.

I pretty much agree.

1. I very highly question the program's ethics for filming the judging process and showing Mao's email that her athlete friend (a Japanese young woman that appears in the middle of the program) received on the phone (I highly question her ethics, too). Judging is done in a public space and the audience with opera glasses could have seen the same thing. But I think that they should get the ISU's permission and I wonder if they had done so. Mao's email is almost exactly the same as what she's already said in interviews and perhaps that may be why the recipient gave the program permission. But I highly doubt if they got permission from Mao.

2. Filming the judging process is not adding anything to the story. It portraits the process more vividly, but it would have been enough to show Mr. Shin Okazaki (a Japanese judge that appears in the middle of the program) demonstrate the same screen used for the Olympic judging to explain what GoE is. The same goes with Mao's email. It's not adding anything to the story because she's already said exactly the same things in interviews.

3. The narrator does not say that the Olympic judging was unfair under the current rules. There's no conspiracy theory. The program introduces a concept of GoE. Orser says that GoEs are important and the white male judge says that Mao's jumps were not good.

4. On the other hand, Plush says that he disagrees with the judging and claims that Mao's 3As should have been given more points.

5. I do not support or defend this program at all because of the item #1 above.

Thank you for editting "GOE" My opinion is "Yes" but not as much as Yuna's and I'm not a judge, of course.

I wonder if there's a difference if you see them skate live vs. on TV.

I've heard from a couple of people that Yuna's speed & ice coverage is superior to that of even Kwan at times, even tho they claimed that Kwan is still the best LOL. :-) (Of course, Kwan always has a space place in my heart...*sigh* So much talent, so much fire and artistry....and no OGM. So sad...) And I wonder if Yuna's superior speed & ice coverage creates a very strong or spectacular impression on the judges, esp. if her competitors don't skate as fast.

I wonder if there's a difference if you see them skate live vs. on TV.

I've heard from a couple of people that Yuna's speed & ice coverage is superior to that of even Kwan at times, even tho they claimed that Kwan is still the best LOL. :-) (Of course, Kwan always has a space place in my heart...*sigh* So much talent, so much fire and artistry....and no OGM. So sad...) And I wonder if Yuna's superior speed & ice coverage creates a very strong or spectacular impression on the judges, esp. if her competitors don't skate as fast.

Maybe, live and on TV will be different. Honestly the only skater whom I have a different impression between live and on TV is Evan. I have no good words to explain my feeling, but Evan was really awesome at live. Even my favorite Daisuke was upstaged at that time. As for Yuna, I only watched her EX at live, so I don't have any idea about her competitive skatings. Off-topic, sorry.

1. I very highly question the program's ethics for filming the judging process and showing mao's email that her athlete friend (a japanese young woman that appears in the middle of the program) received on the phone (i highly question her ethics, too). Judging is done in a public space and the audience with opera glasses could have seen the same thing. But i think that they should get the isu's permission and i wonder if they had done so. Mao's email is almost exactly the same as what she's already said in interviews and perhaps that may be why the recipient gave the program permission. But i highly doubt if they got permission from mao.

I never thought Michelle was so fast on ice though. She was the steadiest but not the one with the most speed. Where Michelle is superior to everyone is in her artistry and presentation. I think Yuna definitely benefits from having great spead and ice coverage. I also think that's what the judges still are pretty nice to Carolina because she is quite fast on ice, even though she's sooo inconsistent.

Do I agree with what they did is the question that's being put to me personally right?

I'm going to be completely honest. I'm ambivalent. I can't say that they were wrong. I can't say that they were right.

To me, it seems like that the new CoP was created to favor a certain style of skating over another, a certain skater over another. Because in the four years that i've watched it, it's changed, and every time it changed, Yuna became harder to beat, and now she's impossible to beat. And then there's just alot of circumstantial evidence, Phil Hersh, NBC, the discourses that kept on cropping up on this board and on other boards, Scott Hamilton, stuff like that that just made me think that the judgement system is not at all neutral, that people create a criteria to allocate the CoP numbers that legitimate subjective choices that are being made for, well, I would imagine, financial gains.

And so I may be wrong, I may be just paranoid, but I had this impression. And then against this what I see as a 'wrong' situation, there's this news piece. And I do think their style of editing is very sensationalist, just like The Mirror or other similar gossip media formats, but the problem is, I don't disagree with what they said. So I can criticize their style or presentation, but I can't criticize their major points, and I don't disagree with the sentiment that might had led this television station to do what they did.

So if you ask me if I think it was okay that they secretly filmed judges, well, I can only go so far as to say that I think if the judging system weren't anonymous, I would find it more wrong. In other words, if they had filmed the Korean judge as an individual, then they would have breached her right to privacy. But anonymous judging has these corrupt innuendos, so I think, this can be considered a form of investigative reporting. After all, Footsiegate would never had occurred if a Canadian television crew hadn't secretly filmed judges. Did the Canadian crew know before filming that they were going to film a scene of corruption?

Figure skating judgements already have this reputation for being made under the table. I don't understand why they just don't get rid of anonymous judging. And I wish judging things like under-rotation, edge calls, PCS, GOEs were consistent and more clearly defined. And there are these bizarre rules, like you get more points for rotating and then falling rather than landing but under-rotating slightly. What's that? It just doesn't make any sense to me.

Do I agree with what they did is the question that's being put to me personally right?

I'm going to be completely honest. I'm ambivalent. I can't say that they were wrong. I can't say that they were right.

To me, it seems like that the new CoP was created to favor a certain style of skating over another, a certain skater over another. Because in the four years that i've watched it, it's changed, and every time it changed, Yuna became harder to beat, and now she's impossible to beat. And then there's just alot of circumstantial evidence, Phil Hersh, NBC, the discourses that kept on cropping up on this board and on other boards, Scott Hamilton, stuff like that that just made me think that the judgement system is not at all neutral, that people create a criteria to allocate the CoP numbers that legitimate subjective choices that are being made for, well, I would imagine, financial gains.

And so I may be wrong, I may be just paranoid, but I had this impression. And then against this what I see as a 'wrong' situation, there's this news piece. And I do think their style of editing is very sensationalist, just like The Mirror or other similar gossip media formats, but the problem is, I don't disagree with what they said. So I can criticize their style or presentation, but I can't criticize their major points, and I don't disagree with the sentiment that might had led this television station to do what they did.

So if you ask me if I think it was okay that they secretly filmed judges, well, I can only go so far as to say that I think if the judging system weren't anonymous, I would find it more wrong. In other words, if they had filmed the Korean judge as an individual, then they would have breached her right to privacy. But anonymous judging has these corrupt innuendos, so I think, this can be considered a form of investigative reporting. After all, Footsiegate would never had occurred if a Canadian television crew hadn't secretly filmed judges. Did the Canadian crew know before filming that they were going to film a scene of corruption?

Figure skating judgements already have this reputation for being made under the table. I don't understand why they just don't get rid of anonymous judging. And I wish judging things like under-rotation, edge calls, PCS, GOEs were consistent and more clearly defined. And there are these bizarre rules, like you get more points for rotating and then falling rather than landing but under-rotating slightly. What's that? It just doesn't make any sense to me.

I'm sorry that I can't be any clearer.

I agree with you that COP has been changing over the last few years, and has been increasingly penalizing (wrong edge take-offs, under-rotations, and so on...). I understand the frustration, especially since Mao has been the most affected by it since she was billed so highly in 2006. But to suggest that the changes have been tailored to favor Yuna is unacceptable. All skaters are being dinged, including Yuna herself sometimes. While Yuna has been known to have textbook technique since her junior years, Mao was the victim of doing too much too soon, at the expense of technique in some areas (flutz, underrotations). Her flaws were initially unaccounted for because of the wow factor of her big tricks. As the system moved more and more towards enforcing clean technique, Mao got penaliized more and more and Yuna started to emerge as a favorite. The only influence Yuna may have had on COP is that she showed that it is indeed possible to have great technique while excecuting impressive "tricks." Unlike Mao, Yuna and her team have done a great job adapting to the system and growing with it (not the opposite). Just compare Yuna's transitions in and out of the jumps now to what they were in 2006, and you'll see what I mean. Mao, on the other hand, has openly admitted to dumbing down her transitions in order to be able to execute the 3As.

Also, people often forget that the IJS had been in use for less than 3 years before 2006. So the period from 2006 to 2010 accounts for more than half of its lifetime. Therefore, it is only very natural that the 2010 version is so different from the 2006 one.